(CNN) - A frail man sits in chains inside a dank, cold prison cell. He has escaped death before but now realizes that his execution is drawing near.

“I am already being poured out like a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come,” the man –the Apostle Paul - says in the Bible's 2 Timothy. “I have fought the good fight. I have finished the race. I have kept the faith.”

The passage is one of the most dramatic scenes in the New Testament. Paul, the most prolific New Testament author, is saying goodbye from a Roman prison cell before being beheaded. His goodbye veers from loneliness to defiance and, finally, to joy.

There’s one just one problem - Paul didn’t write those words. In fact, virtually half the New Testament was written by impostors taking on the names of apostles like Paul. At least according to Bart D. Ehrman, a renowned biblical scholar, who makes the charges in his new book “Forged.”

“There were a lot of people in the ancient world who thought that lying could serve a greater good,” says Ehrman, an expert on ancient biblical manuscripts.In “Forged,” Ehrman claims that:

* At least 11 of the 27 New Testament books are forgeries.

* The New Testament books attributed to Jesus’ disciples could not have been written by them because they were illiterate.

* Many of the New Testament’s forgeries were manufactured by early Christian leaders trying to settle theological feuds.

Were Jesus’ disciples ‘illiterate peasants?'

Ehrman’s book, like many of his previous ones, is already generating backlash. Ben Witherington, a New Testament scholar, has written a lengthy online critique of “Forged.”

Witherington calls Ehrman’s book “Gullible Travels, for it reveals over and over again the willingness of people to believe even outrageous things.”

All of the New Testament books, with the exception of 2 Peter, can be traced back to a very small group of literate Christians, some of whom were eyewitnesses to the lives of Jesus and Paul, Witherington says.

“Forged” also underestimates the considerable role scribes played in transcribing documents during the earliest days of Christianity, Witherington says.

Even if Paul didn’t write the second book of Timothy, he would have dictated it to a scribe for posterity, he says.

“When you have a trusted colleague or co-worker who knows the mind of Paul, there was no problem in antiquity with that trusted co-worker hearing Paul’s last testimony in prison,” he says. “This is not forgery. This is the last will and testament of someone who is dying.”

Ehrman doesn’t confine his critique to Paul’s letters. He challenges the authenticity of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and John. He says that none were written by Jesus' disciplies, citing two reasons.

He says none of the earliest gospels revealed the names of its authors, and that their current names were later added by scribes.

Ehrman also says that two of Jesus’ original disciples, John and Peter, could not have written the books attributed to them in the New Testament because they were illiterate.

“According to Acts 4:13, both Peter and his companion John, also a fisherman, were agrammatoi, a Greek word that literally means ‘unlettered,’ that is, ‘illiterate,’ ’’ he writes.

Will the real Paul stand up?

Ehrman reserves most of his scrutiny for the writings of Paul, which make up the bulk of the New Testament. He says that only about half of the New Testament letters attributed to Paul - 7 of 13 - were actually written by him.

Paul's remaining books are forgeries, Ehrman says. His proof: inconsistencies in the language, choice of words and blatant contradiction in doctrine.

For example, Ehrman says the book of Ephesians doesn’t conform to Paul’s distinctive Greek writing style. He says Paul wrote in short, pointed sentences while Ephesians is full of long Greek sentences (the opening sentence of thanksgiving in Ephesians unfurls a sentence that winds through 12 verses, he says).

“There’s nothing wrong with extremely long sentences in Greek; it just isn’t the way Paul wrote. It’s like Mark Twain and William Faulkner; they both wrote correctly, but you would never mistake the one for the other,” Ehrman writes.

The scholar also points to a famous passage in 1 Corinthians in which Paul is recorded as saying that women should be “silent” in churches and that “if they wish to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home.”

Only three chapters earlier, in the same book, Paul is urging women who pray and prophesy in church to cover their heads with veils, Ehrman says: “If they were allowed to speak in chapter 11, how could they be told not to speak in chapter 14?”

Why people forged

Forgers often did their work because they were trying to settle early church disputes, Ehrman says. The early church was embroiled in conflict - people argued over the treatment of women, leadership and relations between masters and slaves, he says.

“There was competition among different groups of Christians about what to believe and each of these groups wanted to have authority to back up their views,” he says. “If you were a nobody, you wouldn’t sign your own name to your treatise. You would sign Peter or John.”

So people claiming to be Peter and John - and all sorts of people who claimed to know Jesus - went into publishing overdrive. Ehrman estimates that there were about 100 forgeries created in the name of Jesus’ inner-circle during the first four centuries of the church.

Witherington concedes that fabrications and forgeries floated around the earliest Christian communities.

But he doesn’t accept the notion that Peter, for example, could not have been literate because he was a fisherman.

“Fisherman had to do business. Guess what? That involves writing, contracts and signed documents,” he said in an interview.

Witherington says people will gravitate toward Ehrman’s work because the media loves sensationalism.

“We live in a Jesus-haunted culture that’s biblically illiterate,” he says. “Almost anything can pass for historical information… A book liked ‘Forged’ can unsettle people who have no third or fourth opinions to draw upon.”

Ehrman, of course, has another point of view.

“Forged” will help people accept something that it took him a long time to accept, says the author, a former fundamentalist who is now an agnostic.

The New Testament wasn’t written by the finger of God, he says - it has human fingerprints all over its pages.

“I’m not saying people should throw it out or it’s not theologically fruitful,” Ehrman says. “I’m saying that by realizing it contains so many forgeries, it shows that it’s a very human book, down to the fact that some authors lied about who they were.”

soundoff(2,204 Responses)

Well, this is a conspiracy theory. God has kept his Word, the Bible, accurate. Jesus Christ loves and saves.

May 13, 2011 at 5:44 pm |

bp

What specifically is accurate about the bible? Give us some examples Chaz i'm curious to what you think accurate is. Especially on something that is over 2000 years old.

May 13, 2011 at 5:49 pm |

turnagainoutlaw

Baaaa

May 13, 2011 at 5:50 pm |

Bilbo

Another Bible 'scholar'......just what we need. Renowned in fact...by other renowned scholars no doubt...one big mutual admiration society...Drs of Theology all sitting around coming up with these wonderful new ideas. A book shall be next, and maybe a tour...heaps of praise from the elite well dressed slicksters with the white teeth and fast talkin TV personality. The more these phonies listen to themselves the more they actually believe the stuff they're shoveling. Give this guy a mop and have him do something useful.

May 13, 2011 at 5:44 pm |

turnagainoutlaw

Christianity is a religion for slaves

May 13, 2011 at 5:42 pm |

crucified

happy to be a slave..../servant

May 13, 2011 at 6:16 pm |

turnagainoutlaw

That about says it all then. You wear your chains proudly. Some of us have more dignity than that.

May 13, 2011 at 6:32 pm |

loai

There is something called reasoning. God does not tell you "close your mind and worship me". Instead God, the almighty gives you clues that makes you ponder him. He tells you look at the stars, the moon, the skies, the change of day and night, the creatures in the sea. All these together directs you above and beyond how you think of god and his attributes. You see a big elephant and there you see a small mice, you see a dazzling red, you see a transparent light, you see a male, you see a femal. You see a caucassian with blue eyes, you see an african with kiinky hair. God is magnificient in his creation. God always tells you to ponder, ponder and keep pondering. Those who ponder are always the ones wiith strong faith. All praise are bestowen upon him. Unfortunately we can only have a glimps of the majesty of God from what we can interact with, but there so many things unkonw to us that can belittle what alreay think is majestic.

May 13, 2011 at 5:41 pm |

Andrew

You see n-ked mole rats, you see earthquakes, you see tornadoes, you see floods, you see c-ckroaches, and it'd seem god would, to quote the biologist JBS Haldane, has "an inordinate fondness for beetles". You can point to all of the things that you see as beautiful, but that doesn't really actually serve as any real evidence for your claim. It's pretty easy for those things to come about via pretty well understood naturalistic processes, no god required.

May 13, 2011 at 5:49 pm |

crucified

@andrew except that the applied sciences are imaginary....or maybe you could explain the evolutionary process of the bombedier beetle!

May 13, 2011 at 6:13 pm |

PraiseTheLard

crucified says that "the applied sciences are imaginary"

But god is real... yes, sure... BTW: which god? There have been so many...

May 13, 2011 at 6:26 pm |

Andrew

Applied sciences are imaginary only in your very strange interpretation of quantum physics based on what seems to be a very cursory understanding of the holographic principle. Regardless, for the evolution of the bombadeer beetle, Mark Isaak wrote a very nice piece for Talk Origins on the subject, complete with a wealth of citations.

May 13, 2011 at 6:35 pm |

crucified

@andrew you know that this is an example of irriducibility..it is impossible for it an many other species to evolve. and closer to home your inner organs could not either.Your lungs have a specific function when removed you cease. it is irriducible.

May 13, 2011 at 9:14 pm |

PraiseTheLard

Why do we have an appendix? Why do we have a coccyx? Why do males have foreskins if the original biblical tradition tells society to have them removed? I wonder...

May 13, 2011 at 10:34 pm |

Minister Denise

To debunk or discredit another man's work is to debunk and discredit yourself. So what if Ehrman doesn't believe that the Bible is infallible and inspired by God. He knows the Christmas story and the Easter story, and if he chooses not to believe it, I'm sure that's fine with God. God doesn't want anyone to perish, but if that's what a person chooses – so be it. It's between him and God. Sounds like a crisis of faith to me; usually happens when a person doesn't get his way with "his" God.

May 13, 2011 at 5:39 pm |

turnagainoutlaw

Veiled threats again. Love me or I will burn you forever. You should be ashamed of yourself for worshipping such a monstrosity. Good thing it's all a myth.

May 13, 2011 at 5:45 pm |

I_get _it

Minister Denise,

"To debunk or discredit another man's work is to debunk and discredit yourself."

And yet you sit there and discredit Dr. Ehrman's work?

"Sounds like a crisis of faith to me; usually happens when a person doesn't get his way with "his" God."

Perhaps that would be *your* reason for not believing... it is not mine. I have gotten "my way" in life more often than not, both while I was a believer and after that. I don't believe anymore because there is no-one there.

May 13, 2011 at 5:54 pm |

Know What

Minister Denise,

Perhaps you do some good charity-wise with your ministry, but you should really stay away from the theology/philosophy part... you are not good at it.

May 13, 2011 at 6:45 pm |

keith

Yet another book from pseudo-scholar Bart Ehrman...I remember when I was in undergrad and his first book was used as an entry level example of poor textual criticism.

May 13, 2011 at 5:39 pm |

Lucy

I think a lot of modern people still think that lying can serve a greater good too....

May 13, 2011 at 5:37 pm |

Lisa

Just another article trying to discredit God's word. May God forgive them because they dont understand what they are doing.

May 13, 2011 at 5:37 pm |

PraiseTheLard

And you do?

May 13, 2011 at 6:23 pm |

Yah Right

Bart Ehrman lost his faith, and now he wants everyone else too as well. Yes, an agenda is what he certainly has. From his first books he has been controversial, but now he is taking it to a whole new level. I hope he feels good about his attention-seeking and sensationalism. Bart, you gonna give your book earnings away to charity like a good Christian would, or are you gonna keep them to yourself like the statistical majority of agnostics and atheists?

May 13, 2011 at 5:37 pm |

Observer

So Palin and Bush aren't going to make any money from their books? Do you believe the Noah's ark story too?

May 13, 2011 at 5:40 pm |

חֲנוֹךְ

If you read Greek Mythology, you will find a great deal of truth. Not in the sense that medusa turned people to stone or Midas turn everything to gold, but those truths about the human condition. The Bible has been translated multiple times and some words have been mis-translated in the process. Like those Greek myths though, many great truths can be discerned. The spirit of the creator is very much alive for those that would see it; after all the Genesis began with the WORD. Try to see the hidden meaning that is always right in front of you.

May 13, 2011 at 5:36 pm |

Observer

“If you were a nobody, you wouldn’t sign your own name to your treatise. You would sign Peter or John.”

Nothing's changed. Right-wingers without any integrity do the same thing today. They have widely circulated essays by a dozen celebrities (Andy Rooney, Jay Leno, etc.) that were fakes. Just another example of their religious hypocrisy.

May 13, 2011 at 5:35 pm |

Amunaka

Well who would of thought...now how many times has the bible been rewritten.. translated..and by whom over the last couple of millenniums ..

May 13, 2011 at 5:35 pm |

victim of democrat hypocrisy

There are no gods or goddesses, demons or devils, ghosts or goblins. Religion was invented by man to control the masses.

May 13, 2011 at 5:35 pm |

meccano

I didn't think it was any mystery to anyone who has even casually studied the history and origins of the New Testament that some of the writings may not have come from those they are attributed to. I remember very religious scholars often bringing up this point about various parts although never whole books. While it is certainly not a new suggestion, perhaps it is the scope of this author's claim that is new.

The history of the book and its writings and how it was decided what should go in and what should be left out, how the text has been handed down and translated and past on is literally this life's work of many a scholar. It is perhaps a bit flippant and or arrogant to boldly claim, "half of it is a forgery" but the author is correct (and it isn't really a far fetched notion) that the New Testament was written, edited, translated, copied, handed down by humans (with all their flaws).

May 13, 2011 at 5:34 pm |

Steve

Religion....the original pyramid scheme preying upon the gullible and impressionable

May 13, 2011 at 5:33 pm |

Nancy

Of course the disciples didn't write their own books, they had their followers right them after Jesus' death. Why worry about a written book, when your walking and talking to Jesus himself. It was the establishment of the church that really drove the written accounts of the miracles, and wonders performed by Jesus. There weren't believers in the early establishment of the church that had any written word. I.E. Lydia who was a wealthy woman who opened up her home to early Christians, she believed in Jesus and the wonders that he did. She was the first Christian on the European continent. Paul addressed many issues that these early churches had in his letters. So if the disciples not writing the scriptures is a shocker to you, then maybe you need to read the BIble.

May 13, 2011 at 6:12 pm |

turnagainoutlaw

Of course it's a forgery! The whole evil cult is made up, just like every other cult in history.

May 13, 2011 at 5:33 pm |

catocalon

What about 2 Timothy 3:16? "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" – KJV. God inspired the writings of the Apostles and Paul through the work of the Holy Spirit.
Strong's Number: g2315 Greek: theopneustos
"inspired by God" (Theos, "God," pneo, "to breathe"), is used in 2Timothy 3:16, of the Scriptures as distinct from non-inspired writings.

May 13, 2011 at 5:32 pm |

jboisclair

Paul, before he was converted was known as Saul. He was a pharise which meant that he was educated and could quote the entire
old Testament. In other words he had to have read it over and over. He could speak at least 3 languages, hebrew, latin and greek. Also he was loyal to God the Father and Jesus His Son, therefore he would not lie. Luke was a Doctor, nothing else needs to be said. Peter was a fisherman which was a very noble trade in those days. As a businessman he also was educated and could speak greek and hebrew. Timothy was a pastor trained by Paul, therefore in order to preach he would have had to read the O. T.. The best commontary for the O.T. is the New Testament. They all quoted the O.T. and explained it in the nature and character of the God of all grace. They all were educated, it was their custom like it is ours today. True christianity is not a religion, or traditions, it is a personal relationship with God. a true Christian is a person who has realized that he/she is a sinner and in need of a Savior. Jesus died for all of mas personal sins and was buried and has been raised, those who humble themselves and asks Jesus to forgive them and invite Him into their heatrs will be given eternal life. That is the message of the Bible. NOTHING ELSE MATTERS. fordged is fiction.

May 13, 2011 at 5:32 pm |

Andrew

Do you have any independent verifiable evidence to back this up, or are you just declaring it and pretending that by doing so, it is automatically true?

May 13, 2011 at 5:35 pm |

crucified

@Andrew I have proof..do you want to hear it? it of course would make atheism look extremely frail and ignorant?Well?

May 13, 2011 at 5:38 pm |

John

Bart Ehrman is a fake and so are his lying teachings. AND he is NOT a well RESPECTED Bible scholar – he is a heretic, a pagan and servant of the Evil One.

May 13, 2011 at 5:42 pm |

Andrew

By all means, go ahead. Fair warning though, I'm a physics major so I really recommend no strawmen of the big bang, cause that I'm fairly well versed on. (If you want to champion strawmen of other sciences, I'll still tear them apart to the best of my abilities, but they're not my strong suit)
I've heard most "evidence" proposed by your ilk, but I'm always interested to see if you guys can come up with something new.

May 13, 2011 at 5:43 pm |

Gina

Right on

May 13, 2011 at 5:44 pm |

Ashley

John, you are a pathetic, brain washed puppet. I would take the word of a PhD over a moron like you any day.

May 13, 2011 at 5:48 pm |

Matt

Any "proof" that has been provided to me has always been weak to say the least. I do not know why it is so difficult to believe that maybe, just maybe, it isn't all the the truth in there. I mean, perhaps you know more than the guy that spends his entire life researching this stuff and who went to multiple schools AS a devout christian and got his phd at Princeton Theological Seminary. We were burning people as witches not too long ago. People believed the world was flat. They believed we were the center of our solar system and galaxy. They were gullible. Do you honestly think anything done back then would have been anything more than a cute magic trick today? Do you honestly believe that people were completely infalible and told stories EXACTLY how they occured. (They can't do that now, so why then?) Do you honestly believe that God, with all of that power can only have one son and chose to put them at a specific period of time in human history thousands of years after our existence?

I've entertained the idea of it. I've read several versions of the bible, as well as other religious texts. Have you actively challenged and tried to discredit your own beliefs or have you simply defended them with "proof"?

May 13, 2011 at 5:50 pm |

Dave

Presumably all of the popes were "loyal to God" as well, so I guess none of them ever lied ... or cheated ... or destroyed writings they didn't approve of ... or sanctioned murder. And presumably you are also "loyal to God", so I guess you've never lied either, right?

May 13, 2011 at 5:53 pm |

crucified

@Andrew since you are a physics major I will lay it down through physics..quantum physics to be exact.. you existance is an illusion to a greater reality. when in 1982 nonlocally connection was proven..therefore your existance is undieniably "holographic"...Could you create an enviroment, a complete eco system in a confined area that a fish would believe always existed..? of course you could.. you are the fish! Quatum physics proves that the truer existance is not physical and not measurable by senses therefore the applied sciences are useless other that perpetuating our imagination further down a dead end.. the truer existance is that you have a Creator...who Created an enviroment for you..this removes all randomness and chance from the equation.and you are in a reality whether you like it or not..and the rules have been laid before you..however, if you continue to not accept the greater state of consciousness, the results are the same. You will face the creator who made the hologram and be judged by him. Jesus Christ.

May 13, 2011 at 5:58 pm |

crucified

@andrew another note...images ie holographs are not random, and purposeless.. they have specific functions, meaning, value, and percieved structure.. they do not evolve but are created.

May 13, 2011 at 6:05 pm |

Attman

@crucified Yes I want proof, post it or your just full of it

May 13, 2011 at 6:24 pm |

Andrew

I'm breaking this into two posts because CNN's auto-filter is picking up on some word that I've yet to find. Honestly they need a better whitespace checker. It take no more than a day to fix that problem for even just a single coder.

Oh god I fear every time anyone ever says the words "quantum physics".
A) The holographic principle is an outgrowth of some string theory models for quantum gravity. String theory has no empirical evidence, like all other quantum gravity models, and even among string theory, the holographic principle is not necessarily true. Treating string theory as "proven" is certainly beyond any string theorist would ever claim, h3ll not even Brian Greene goes as far as you do, despite his very vested interest in doing so.

B) All the holographic principle does, even -ssuming it's correct, has nothing to do with what you're talking about. The holographic principle was provided to address problems concerning black holes. Consider, for a moment, the maximum amount of energy in relativity which could be crammed into a space scales with the m-ss of a black hole for a radius R (schwarzschild radius) So consider then that you've got a photon with a bit of information (its quantum state, consider up or down), the maximum amount of information you could cram into a sphere of radius R would scale according to the surface area of the sphere you're enclosing. That means information is not scaling according to volume, but with fewer degrees of freedom. So interactions we see in three dimensions are really projections of interactions happening on a smaller dimensional surface. That is not saying "your existence is an illusion to a greater reality", if anything, it's saying "you exist, but in a less stunning reality than what you see". But that's pretty deniable in either case, since we have no evidence to -ssume that the holographic principle is true, again this is an outgrowth of quantum gravity which we have no verifiable evidence for.

D) How did you go from that to "this implies a creator", there seems to be quite a logical disconnect there.

May 13, 2011 at 6:27 pm |

Andrew

Seriously, whenever anyone says the words "quantum physics", it seldom ends with anything that realistically reflects quantum physics. If you want to make a straw-man with me, I really suggest you don't pick physics. (If you want, I can go more in depth into how the holographic principle functions, but I doubt you have much of a physics background in any case, so explaining it to you would seem fruitless. It'd be like trying to explain topology to a class of algebra students, it wouldn't work except in the most qualitative sense)

May 13, 2011 at 6:30 pm |

crucified

@attman I said it earler in post but here is the equation since i cannot post higher math from keyboard.. it is time-independant schrodinger equation

May 13, 2011 at 6:36 pm |

Andrew

It's fairly easy to post higher order math with a keyboard if you've ever worked in the sciences. Just write it in TeX format, those of us who recognise the notation are fine with it, and those of us who aren't can just put it into a TeX editor. There are dozens online for those who don't have one on their computer.

... I fail to see how that equation is relevant though. Even a little bit.

May 13, 2011 at 6:41 pm |

crucified

@andrew you are denieing the mathmatical, and tested proof in 1981 of nonlocally connected. It was proven that there are 2 possibilities. one something travels faster than light, or 2 there are non locally connected..the holographic model. I did not say anything about string theory and did not even go into black holes..it does not explain these thing it explains behaviors at a sub atomic level..and as we examine smaller and smaller realms they have no dimension.. and also their behaviors change as they are observed. that we are all interconnected somehow subatomically and everything is relationship based not particle based. therefore your existance is holographic to a truer existance..how do you expect to explain infinite anything with finite sensory perceptions interpreted by the brain that interpretes the same hologram..I did not make a large jump to Creation for it defines purpose and removes chance to be interconnected. images are not random. the have purpose and cause.

May 13, 2011 at 6:45 pm |

crucified

@ andrew actually I am not saying science disproves science..I am saying science disproves applied (measurable) sciences ...and I am saying that science proves the existance of a greater reality... It however sounds like you are saying that you do not believe the physics you majored in....I guess you have to take it on faith...or the fact of the equations.

And what "mathmatical and tested proof of nonlocally connected"? Primarily, that's not a citation. Secondarily, "non-locally connected" is nonsense without context, are we talking about non-locally connected boundaries, are we talking about non-locally connected sets, what? (Oddly enough I did a google scholar search for all iterations of 'non-locally connected', 'nonlocally connected', 'non locally connected' in the year 1981 and found, well, no articles. At all. What the hell are you talking about?)

What it sounds like to me is that you're mangling concepts of light cones when trying to see how two separate events in spacetime can be causally connected, timelike lightlike or spacelike, but even that I'm not quite certain of. I really have NO idea what you're referring to, and frankly, I'm not even sure if you know what you're referring to.

And you can't talk about the holographic principle without going into string theory and black holes because that was how physicists formulated the holographic principle in the first place! So... if you're not talking about them... then just what ARE you talking about? How many concepts are you mangling together?

I really can't decipher anything you said, it's all nonsense, it's just about as bad as when new age guru's talk about 'quantum physics proves we can change the world with our minds!' Then gets lost in a sea of poorly defined concepts and logically insane leaps.

May 13, 2011 at 7:01 pm |

crucified

I am sorry it was 1982.. by alain aspect..the two particle experiment. are you stating that as we go deeper into tthe sub atomic level they do have dimension.. that is dangerous.. and false.. your reality is an extention of a greater one.. I have not had to bring up string or black holes in my communication and just because that was ignited the concept and began the search does not mean that new concepts do not come from.. here is the case. if subatomic particle have behaviors that have relationship with no dimension and non localality. then trying to state that we have measurable changes at the illusionary macro level is impossible. science is simply stating what Christians have said all along..this is not the true existance..the spiritual is..and it has design. the 1973 nobel prize winner brian Josephson.. said and believed that Bohm's implicate order may someday even lead to the inclusion of God with in the framework of science. which it now does.

May 13, 2011 at 7:13 pm |

Andrew

Ah NOW we're getting somewhere. Yeah this is a pretty commonly cited aspect of entangled particles, but... it does nothing of what you're implying. Primarily speaking, it doesn't actually state that information travels faster than light, in that it is impossible to change the states. You observe one, and the other becomes determined, but you can't necessarily impact the state of the first observation, so no information could be transmitted. It is a loophole in relativity such that quantum mechanics doesn't go against relativity on a large scale. It doesn't require the holographic principle to fix, which again is used for information and is formulated via string theory concerning the nature of black holes.

And what I'm stating is that if we accept the holographic principle at its principle, then the reality we see is a projection from a smaller dimensional space. "3D projection from a 2D input" as it were, hence "hologram". You again really do seem to be mangling concepts, and it's looking more and more like when those new age gurus cite the 'double slit experiment' as 'proof humans can change reality with their mind', you're taking experiments and applying them in weird and seemingly very wrong ways. Truthfully, I'm not even sure if you really understand the definition of the word 'dimension' in context of physics. Have you even ever taken a linear algebra (no, not algebra) course?

May 13, 2011 at 7:30 pm |

Andrew

Anyway, crucified, I've got work to do today and it's too pretty to not go to the beach and read as well, so I'm going to leave you to your very strange vision of physics. I really do recommend though that you go back to university and start from square one, because it seems like you're trying to appeal to concepts without a grasp of even the fundamentals.

May 13, 2011 at 7:33 pm |

crusified

@andrew I like the way you try to confuse the subject the principle is that at the sub atomic level dimension is undefined.. You were created...and will see a colmination of your conscience choices in the end. the creator of this existance will judge his creation on the acceptance of him.

May 13, 2011 at 7:53 pm |

Rabia Diluvio

The Gospel which has always seemed to me to be the most accurate representation of early Christianity is the Gospel of Thomas...which, of course, is not one of the books of the Bible.

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.